AuthorTopic: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.  (Read 13086 times)

Offline Helm

  • Moderator
  • 0110
  • *
  • Posts: 5159
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Asides-Bsides

Offline Indigo

  • Administrator
  • 0011
  • *
  • Posts: 946
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Artist, Indie Game Dev
    • DanFessler
    • DanFessler
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/849.htm
    • DanFessler
    • DanFessler
    • View Profile
    • Portfolio

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #1 on: April 12, 2016, 07:23:13 pm
it's great to hear him describe his process for authoring the color cycling scenes.  Super great stuff

Offline 0xDB

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 873
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Dennis inter-is.
    • dennisbusch_de
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/1287.htm
    • 0xdb
    • View Profile
    • 0xDB

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #2 on: April 12, 2016, 07:39:32 pm
Yeah, loved every minute of it. Ironically the purists and wannabe gatekeepers of the art form would probably dismiss a lot of his process as forbidden "dirty" tooling. ::)

Although his current work is not very polished on the pixel level (thinking about what he's doing for Thimbleweed Park at the moment), it's just highly functional and very charming and it would be completely unpractical/impossible to pump out that amount of art in a reasonable time if one wanted to carefully anti-alias everywhere and massage all clusters into place until perfection.

Offline Helm

  • Moderator
  • 0110
  • *
  • Posts: 5159
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Asides-Bsides

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #3 on: April 12, 2016, 08:22:20 pm
Regardless of whether agrees with his method or whatever, dismissing a person such as he is like disregarding a huge part of the history of the medium, which he was there to see grow and influence as he went.

Offline Gil

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1543
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Too square to be hip
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/475.htm
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #4 on: April 13, 2016, 08:36:19 am
Oh man, I love Mark Ferrari so much. He's right up my alley in more than just one way, thanks for sharing that talk.

I think his main point is very interesting: that the reason he was able to master the form was time+tools. That a tool, such as the latest greatest game engine is worthless, if no one is spending ten years mastering the form. You can see this on consoles, by comparing the graphics of a console release title to an end-of-life title.

That being said, Mark is very much a tools person, learning the nooks and crannies of tools to be able to produce art that looks better than what his peers are able to do with those same restrictions. This philosophy is completely the opposite of what a lot of people here and in the larger "pixel art" sphere are trying to do by trying to make art of a similar quality with as much restrictions as they can muster. The only reason Mark's art is even interesting to a lot of us, is that time factor, causing him to stay in the 8bit sphere for so long.

Personally I'm somewhere in between Mark's camp and the pixel art camp (I think what Tim Soret and Cyangmou are doing is more or less where I find myself going to). Not that any camp is "right", people should find value where they find value.

Offline Ai

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1057
  • Karma: +2/-0
  • finti
    • http://pixeljoint.com/pixels/profile.asp?id=1996
    • finticemo
    • View Profile

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #5 on: April 13, 2016, 10:13:11 am
* I think a semi-automatic way of applying dithering (so that the TP scenes could have similar amounts of work put in but result in less banding) is possible, since good 'shape-wise' smoothing is already possible (see GMIC Anisotropic smoothing filter). Probably it would generate a result with dithering in all areas and you'd then have to erase out bits that looked uncrisp / sabotaged the effect you were going for.

* So, his method boils down to thoughtful and layered use of templating.. I don't really agree with the AA method (just before 00:24:00), it seems very limited and I would usually think it would be faster to just throw the pixels down by hand.

But it did inspire me to think about whether there is a templating-based way to do it better.

I think having a single 'A onto B @ N% opacity' template would solve it for any given pair of two colors (with A being the color region 'on top' that you are AAing 'over'/'into' B).
Programmatically it's simple: Vectorize the region A (eg. via PoTrace commandline interface) -> generates a 8-bit mask M. Iterate over the mask M, reading each pixel in the mask (-> variable Mp) and same location in the original image (-> variable Ip). If 0 < Mp < 255, then look up the color in the 'A on Ip' lookup table (scaling 0..255 to 0...lookuptable_width) and write that color to the image. Otherwise don't change the pixel color at that location (when Mp is 0 or 255, pixel is either already fully inside the region or fully outside the region)

Interfacewise I guess you'd want a palette-editor-like gui, except with very minimal usage of screen estate. Manually poking LUT pixels would be a bit of a pain (on about the same level as manually poking AA pixels, worse if you don't get realtime feedback)


* His anecdote and comments around 00:32:00 echoes a thought I have had increasingly.. that the tool hardly matters, except as an educational thing -- art is about a) intent and b) understanding, and if you have both of those regarding your subject matter, you will more or less consistently produce good art, and if you don't, you won't. (not all tools have the same depth, but hardly any tool gets used to its full depth either)

Fascinating that he is a relative technophobe. When viewing his works before I thought 'that must be done via some compositing code that mixes images in a palette-friendly, well-defined way to produce the single 8bit image that's the final result'. The process he describes actually doing seems.. not 'ridiculously onerous' so much as 'obsessive' and indeed as he says, extremely tedious.

* 00:44:00 CGA info seems wrong? pretty sure CGA = 4 colors used for whole picture.
* 00:49:00 Is this really correct? Photoshop has no shapeburst gradient fill? Or he just didn't think to do the "smooth"/CG-ish fill and then make it dithered (indexization)?
I also think that he would probably get a lot out of learning either ImageMagick or GMIC.. CLI/scripted image processing seems an extremely close fit for the more highly structured parts of his workflow.

* 00:52:00 interesting illustration of how to use shapeburst/contour type fills in a way that doesn't look totally cheap. 'clown color templates' is kind of catchy, heh.
If you insist on being pessimistic about your own abilities, consider also being pessimistic about the accuracy of that pessimistic judgement.

Offline Gil

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1543
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Too square to be hip
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/475.htm
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #6 on: April 13, 2016, 11:04:28 am
Ai, we are miles and miles ahead of what he's doing right now, it's his older stuff that's interesting, not his workflow in Photoshop today, which I thought was rather cringe worthy. The resulting art is fun, but that workflow could be a lot better. He never claimed to be an expert on Photoshop though, in fact, he clearly stated that tool experience is very important to him.

Offline RAV

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 293
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Blackbox Voxel Tool

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #7 on: April 13, 2016, 12:12:27 pm
I like that there's "something for everyone".
So I kinda agree with everyone here.

Love his anecdote that reminds artists not to be simple tool-can-do monkeys.
And that he was picked as game artist precisely for his experience in non digital.
Something like "Easier to make an artist go digital than a technician do good art."


And yet I find it interesting that he's actually very much torn on the matter of tools non the less.
Throughout the video you'll find quotes that go either way, like I would expect from a master.

He critisized a common over-reliance on tools for art,
and yet also the quick rate of tool obsolescence for industry.

He loved exploring the creative depth of the pixel art tool with his general art knowledge.
This difference in experience too is what made his art clearly stand out on the high end.

For him, the genre definition of PixelArt pretty much was what you could do in Deluxe Paint.
He spent many years developing his art techniques specific to pixel art and this tool,
becoming the perfect fusion of general and specific art knowledge.

To a point, a decade of experience let him do things that make any artist blush today.
Just by seeing these videos explaining colour cycling and pattern tiling,
you are so very far away from producing his level of quality,
even if you use DeluxePaint, but especially if you've never had
any experience with pixel art tool technique at all.
Your experience in other arts is most important,
but that doesn't make pixel art shallow.

Pixel art is really not just a matter of applying dithering or aa by pixel,
but the specific creativity of the common workflows to a certain ruleset,
manifest in the mechanics of palette, tile and sprite features,
that have you do a planning for world building that's unique.

While switching tools away from what he understood for pixel art,
didn't stop him from being a great artist, he did feel missing something,
something fulfilling he really liked doing, that gave him identity,
not just as about any artist, but as a pixel artist. Inspiring.

Offline Gil

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1543
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Too square to be hip
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/475.htm
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #8 on: April 13, 2016, 12:19:02 pm
For him, the genre definition of PixelArt pretty much was what you could do in Deluxe Paint.
Yeah, that's it exactly, which is more of what we would call a "demoscene" mindset, than what most of us are trying to do, especially at more genre-specific galleries, like PixelJoint. That said, even for people that are looking towards that part of the experience, there's a lot of gems in this talk :)

Offline Ai

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1057
  • Karma: +2/-0
  • finti
    • http://pixeljoint.com/pixels/profile.asp?id=1996
    • finticemo
    • View Profile

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #9 on: April 13, 2016, 12:57:40 pm
Ai, we are miles and miles ahead of what he's doing right now, it's his older stuff that's interesting, not his workflow in Photoshop today, which I thought was rather cringe worthy.
Not sure what you're referring to here -- maybe my comment about shapeburst, which should be taken with the context that I have no experience with Photoshop and thus would expect it to have shapeburst but don't actually know. I agree his photoshop technique is unremarkable to say the least, but the technique was only a peripheral concern in my post. The practical, step by step illustration of the concept of highly layered templating is the most valuable part of the video, for me.

(When I talk about this stuff, it is always as someone who can -- and expects to -- write their own tools. Unless the fundamental basis for those tools is incredibly broken, that's generally what I focus on -- what tool do I need to make? If I don't know yet, what process is it that I need to break down into a workflow->tools?)

Personally I think an artist needs to master each of their tools, but to some extent this mastery of the tools they already know comes through extending themselves to new tools.. because each tool teaches certain ways of thinking, and getting stuck on one tool == getting stuck in one substrata of ways of thinking about art.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2016, 01:27:39 pm by Ai »
If you insist on being pessimistic about your own abilities, consider also being pessimistic about the accuracy of that pessimistic judgement.

Offline Gil

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1543
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Too square to be hip
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/475.htm
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #10 on: April 13, 2016, 01:19:55 pm
Not sure what you're referring to here
I was just agreeing with the general tone of your post, that there's better ways these days to go about what he's trying to do. Again, that didn't stop the video from blowing me away :)

Offline Probo

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 317
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #11 on: April 13, 2016, 09:10:13 pm
Really interesting talk, thanks for posting. Guys got mad skillz fo sho. My main lesson from this wasn't technical though, it was to just get better at drawing and rendering! XD

oh and I'm now really looking forward to this huckerby fellow's pixel art program!!
« Last Edit: April 13, 2016, 09:24:00 pm by Probo »

Offline trough

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 66
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #12 on: April 13, 2016, 11:30:59 pm
Here is information on the Joe Huckaby with whom Mark Ferrari worked and endorses in this video.  Mark says that Joe is developing a pixel-art graphics program which will include features not seen since DPaint, and a workflow better than that of Cosmigo's Pro Motion.  It should be appearing 2017.

If Mark is excited about it, others here might like to keep watch.

https://about.me/jhuckaby
https://twitter.com/jhuckaby
https://pixlcore.com
https://github.com/jhuckaby
Color cycling sites displayed in the video:
http://www.effectgames.com/demos/canvascycle/
http://www.effectgames.com/demos/worlds/

Mark mentions that he still uses DPaint in DOSBox for color-cycling projects, because he is unaware of an editor with its capabilities.  However, GrafX2 provides a color cycling feature in its gradation menu [Alt+G] and support for DPaint .IFF files.  I am not sure if he is unaware of GrafX2, or if there are other features still missing.  I think I will email him about it.

Offline Ai

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1057
  • Karma: +2/-0
  • finti
    • http://pixeljoint.com/pixels/profile.asp?id=1996
    • finticemo
    • View Profile

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #13 on: April 14, 2016, 12:50:27 am
However, GrafX2 provides a color cycling feature in its gradation menu [Alt+G] and support for DPaint .IFF files.  I am not sure if he is unaware of GrafX2, or if there are other features still missing.  I think I will email him about it.
GrafX2 was mentioned in a question near the end; he basically ignored it.

Relative to DPaint, there -are- features missing (the 'contour-fitted' / 'shapeburst' fill he used in the waterfalls, for example, and automatic antialiasing.).

Not sure what you're referring to here

I was just agreeing with the general tone of your post, that there's better ways these days to go about what he's trying to do. Again, that didn't stop the video from blowing me away :)
Ah, NVM then, just my insecurity apparently.
If you insist on being pessimistic about your own abilities, consider also being pessimistic about the accuracy of that pessimistic judgement.

Offline RAV

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 293
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Blackbox Voxel Tool

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #14 on: April 14, 2016, 10:40:40 am
Want to note though, I believe that mastering a tool is much more than knowing where the buttons are. And that the mindset that Pixel Art would be merely an extension of general arts and a reduction of digital painting, is very much part of what hurt pixel art as a rusty cage in my eyes. It's not that it's actually wrong, but I believe if you put too much emphasis on thinking it like that, it's no surprise classic pixel art appears nothing more than stale, annoying and shallow to most. It's been what bugs me about tool development for a long time now, and that I think it's important to figure how we inform that.

There are all kinds of long lost features from the old days that were heavily based on the unique properties of pixel art, that were not only necessary to run, but also incredibly fun to be creative with and gain experience in, unlike anything else. And that on top of that there is yet much more inventive potential to pixel art than in just remaking the past.



At the same time, everyone has limits. yes me too.

For example, mine is when watching people remake NES sprites in Minecraft. They spend literally hours to create something that shouldn't take more than five minutes. It's sad that this isn't an exaggeration. It requires me a lot of discipline and good attiude, to interpret this as an amazing quality of humankind, than depressing stupidity. It is in this moment, you will find me mumbling about the importance of results, while they will point out their pride in this process, and that the challenge makes it worthwhile, that they wouldn't want it any other way. I want something different. But I must accept that. with gnashing teeth. The Minecraft purists. Yes, that exists. it's big. Bigger than pixel purists.

But one thing is for sure, no matter what you do, eventually everyone looks stupid. and dead.



« Last Edit: April 14, 2016, 02:21:56 pm by RAV »

Offline Ai

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1057
  • Karma: +2/-0
  • finti
    • http://pixeljoint.com/pixels/profile.asp?id=1996
    • finticemo
    • View Profile

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #15 on: April 14, 2016, 03:24:51 pm
Want to note though, I believe that mastering a tool is much more than knowing where the buttons are. And that the mindset that Pixel Art would be merely an extension of general arts and a reduction of digital painting, is very much part of what hurt pixel art as a rusty cage in my eyes. It's not that it's actually wrong,
I think I have to disagree here - it -is- basically wrong. Pixel art, assembler for embedded systems, duplo, etc, are all primarily 'you can put only so many X into Y' optimization problems, whereas CG, programming for desktop systems, RL construction are really only limited by time and money.  The parallels in 'what the goal is' is far overshadowed by the differences in 'effective ways to get there'.
If you insist on being pessimistic about your own abilities, consider also being pessimistic about the accuracy of that pessimistic judgement.

Offline RAV

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 293
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Blackbox Voxel Tool

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #16 on: April 14, 2016, 04:35:41 pm
It's good you boil it down to this, because that's something I'd like to talk about.

When I see a line of proper high level code, I see much more in it, because I know what actually happens down on the low. And this realization, consciously and sub-consciously, heavily impacts many decisions on the higher levels. Many of my high level decisions would be much poorer without. It is often actually pretty severe, in how it influences radical architecture design, choice of algorithms and math. Because just as art draws from visual reality, coding has to deal with the reality of hardware, even if we like to forget that these days. For me there is no clear cut border between low level and high level, that it would be these two entirely different worlds of thinking modes, divided by the vacuum of space, and you should stay on the warmer and brighter one, 90% of your time.

And a similar idea guides my thoughts about pixel art. To slightly caricature the problem, the sentiment of basically "Well, I should rather be doing some real art than pixel art in my time -- more bang for the buck", is somewhat understandable, but a pixel art that is a mere after-thought, robs you a lot of unique creative inspiration, a reason to bother with any pixel art at all, and affects how you construct pixel art tools.

Many of the system features of how graphics work, how colour palette, and tiles and sprites work, how you manage your resources as an artist, how you go about constructing things, the reality of the tool given, is also a high level inspirational component to your creativity. It kinda goes into how people feel that the limits of pixel art stimulates their creativity. Pixel Art is a joint effort, and the design decisions of coders and artists affected each other. And the creativity coders put into pixel art tools has been much more than restricting it in some number, it also provided mechanics with which to rethink the art on more than the lowest level, sometimes in new surprising ways, be it good or bad, that still had another value to art, that other art tools didn't give.

And by that thought, a pixel art that's just reduced to the problem of how many colours, and how to dither and aa, is just a little fragment of what pixel art means to me creatively, and how that guides my own development. I indeed want to make pixel art deep. This is my motivation and mindset for design. Is it true? can it be? even if not, I feel it's better for my work to go at it with this attitude, to search for what makes pixel art worth your time. And that's sort of why I look for the creative "dignity" and opportunity of pixel art, as something more than a robot's labor or an autist's obsession.

So that's where I am coming from. I understand your position though, that the pixel art scene is beset by too much lack in art fundamentals, and that this is most what holds back many in their pixel art, and thus your response is the other way around.


« Last Edit: April 14, 2016, 05:06:01 pm by RAV »

Offline RAV

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 293
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Blackbox Voxel Tool

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #17 on: April 14, 2016, 10:53:10 pm
Or here something else:

When I look at the history of pixel art, I find it remarkable how stupid it often was, if you look at it from a classic artist point of view. From the choices in the preset palettes to all kinds of crap everywhere, that would distract you from how you're supposed to go about real art, coders sure did their best to make your life miserable. And yet here we are today loving it in retrospective. Is that Stockholm syndrome? S&M games?

It kinda makes me think, my job is not to make you feel cushy and give you what you say you want, but to present you an outrageous oddity, flip the finger to you, and tell you to deal with it for art. My computer doesn't care about your feelings and stuff. Just do the impossible, or go fuck yourself. And no one pays you to do fancy pencil sketches. Pixel sprites for 24h in a sweatshop, or burn in hell.

You can send me your gratitude with flowers later, if you're still alive.

like, yeah, totally.

Something kinda gives me the impression, Mark Ferrari "learned to love" pixel art for games and stuff. I suspect it wasn't love on first sight. He got money, so that's what he did. until you tell yourself how great that is, that how you spend that time fiddling around had a greater meaning, and other artists shouldn't pity you, but admire you.

I'm a total ass. A double cheek.




« Last Edit: April 16, 2016, 04:41:59 pm by RAV »

Offline Ai

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1057
  • Karma: +2/-0
  • finti
    • http://pixeljoint.com/pixels/profile.asp?id=1996
    • finticemo
    • View Profile

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #18 on: April 15, 2016, 12:59:50 am
It's good you boil it down to this, because that's something I'd like to talk about.

When I see a line of proper high level code, I see much more in it, because I know what actually happens down on the low. And this realization, consciously and sub-consciously, heavily impacts many decisions on the higher levels. Many of my high level decisions would be much poorer without. It is often actually pretty severe, in how it influences radical architecture design, choice of algorithms and math. Because just as art draws from visual reality, coding has to deal with the reality of hardware, even if we like to forget that these days. For me there is no clear cut border between low level and high level, that it would be these two entirely different worlds of thinking modes, divided by the vacuum of space, and you should stay on the warmer and brighter one, 90% of your time.
That is IMO the difference between levels of understanding. To the master of an art, they no longer have to think about things like gesture, form, color at length, because they have largely internalized the workings of those things. But this is not true for someone who is not a master. The less skills you already have, the more the difference between mediums affects you; you will tend to conform to the idiosyncracies of the medium, rather than choosing it ahead of time because you know it can do what you want. So it needs to be viewed in terms of what it will teach you, which I maintain that for pixel art is optimization under tight constraints, and for CG is more about efficient processes (since you have the latitude to fit in almost anything you want but not infinite time)

Quote
And a similar idea guides my thoughts about pixel art. To slightly caricature the problem, the sentiment of basically "Well, I should rather be doing some real art than pixel art in my time -- more bang for the buck", is somewhat understandable, but a pixel art that is a mere after-thought, robs you a lot of unique creative inspiration, a reason to bother with any pixel art at all, and affects how you construct pixel art tools.
Certainly - there are things that you would only think to do in the first place if thinking in terms of pixel art. I feel the need to point out that my posts in this thread have not been directed at the problem of where to spend one's time, though. Rather, at the issue that different media teach you different skills, and in the case of tightly constrained media like pixel art, those skills are highly technical and specific (iow, the problems you are pushed to spend most time on solving are highly technical and specific to the media).

Quote
So that's where I am coming from. I understand your position though, that the pixel art scene is beset by too much lack in art fundamentals, and that this is most what holds back many in their pixel art, and thus your response is the other way around.
Again, my response here is not attempting to claim that one is better than the other, simply that the processes and skills involved are fundamentally different -- not entirely different, or people wouldn't make the mistake of thinking of pixel art as a 'reduced CGing', but unquestionably different enough that it should be clear that it IS a mistake. Even though you attempt to say that it's not exactly wrong, my impression is that you agree with me (otherwise you wouldn't make statements like "a pixel art that is a mere after-thought, robs you a lot of unique creative inspiration, a reason to bother with any pixel art at all, and affects how you construct pixel art tools.")

Regarding your other post, IMO that was addressed in the video: limitations inspire creativity, and that's what we like. The EGA palette was pretty terrible but it also made us think, construct things differently, make different patterns than we would if we had "unlimited" resources.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2016, 01:04:17 am by Ai »
If you insist on being pessimistic about your own abilities, consider also being pessimistic about the accuracy of that pessimistic judgement.

Offline RAV

  • 0010
  • *
  • Posts: 293
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Blackbox Voxel Tool

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #19 on: April 15, 2016, 08:13:10 am
So yeah, it's not just what's being said, but what it implies further, and the connections.
And it's not that I seriously disagree, with you or anyone, but that I find it important to add this note.

That even though we should realize that pixel art is not the best means of exercising every important aspect of art skills, that in that recommendation, we don't delegate Pixel Art down to an uninspired after-thought, after we're done doing the real work. Because that's what I'm noticing often about "high level" pixel pieces, as much as we'd notice a lack of fundaments to "low level" pieces: it really looks like pixel art is just a matter of polishing pass at the end. And that a pixel art tool is just a matter of deactivating auto-AA and setting nearest neighbour, avoid most of the functions, and keep colours below 256.

That's not what pixel art was in the past. or only a part of it. Pixel Art happened from the very start you made a piece, it happened on the constructive macro level of a visual, not just micro-ing the pixel level. Even if you made what looked like a painting, it was quite different making that than doing an actual painting. Nowadays, we scan a drawing, we actually paint, clean it up, and that last step that's the most uncreative, that's what makes it pixel art now. And maybe that's okay. Maybe it's for the better. Just get it over with. But at the same time, I find it harder and harder to see what's the point of pixel art as just that.

And even though I know I'm a pest, and maybe it's not relevant, but I feel like mentioning that.

I do very much recommend people to make most use of higher programming languages, engines and frameworks, especially with quick focus study on algorithms and math. But I also tell them, when they make their particular choice on something for a project, know exactly why you picked that, and make use to the fullest extend of what it can offer. Don't pick C if you have no ambition and need in memory management, else it will just annoy you. But whatever it is you pick even on high level, you must learn to interpret your general computer science through specific application, and to master this kind of negotiation between levels, to become one to greatest effect, requires much dedication and experience as well. And every language will make its darn best to convince you, why it's so much better and different than anything else, maybe it really isn't, but hopefully it will at least attempt to develop itself to a depth of interesting concepts, that very much qualify and challenge everything else you know.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2016, 01:34:15 pm by RAV »

Offline Gil

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1543
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Too square to be hip
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/475.htm
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #20 on: April 15, 2016, 08:17:57 am
I like watching pretty pictures and having Mark Ferrari explain them :crazy:

Offline JessBowers

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • http://pixeljoint.com/pixelart/43690.htm
    • View Profile

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #21 on: April 15, 2016, 03:32:47 pm
Love this video. Quick question: At near 24:10 he says, "I'm doing this with a mouse now. At home I use a 21" [????] which is a lot less awkward than doing this with a mouse."

What did he say he was using?

Thanks!

Offline 0xDB

  • 0011
  • **
  • Posts: 873
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Dennis inter-is.
    • dennisbusch_de
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/1287.htm
    • 0xdb
    • View Profile
    • 0xDB

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #22 on: April 15, 2016, 05:10:36 pm
Love this video. Quick question: At near 24:10 he says, "I'm doing this with a mouse now. At home I use a 21" [????] which is a lot less awkward than doing this with a mouse."

What did he say he was using?

Thanks!
Probably a "Wacom Cintiq" or just any tablet (without checking what he actually said :P).

Offline Gil

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1543
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Too square to be hip
    • http://pixeljoint.com/p/475.htm
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #23 on: April 15, 2016, 05:58:45 pm
Yeah, he said 21 inch Cintiq

Offline JessBowers

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • http://pixeljoint.com/pixelart/43690.htm
    • View Profile

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #24 on: April 15, 2016, 08:23:43 pm
Thanks, folks!

Offline kullenberg

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 92
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #25 on: April 28, 2016, 03:53:07 am
What does he mean by "compressing" the dithering?

Offline Ai

  • 0100
  • ***
  • Posts: 1057
  • Karma: +2/-0
  • finti
    • http://pixeljoint.com/pixels/profile.asp?id=1996
    • finticemo
    • View Profile

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #26 on: April 28, 2016, 03:01:02 pm
What does he mean by "compressing" the dithering?
Just in the usual, 'data compression' sense. RLE encoding was a typical compression technique used at the time, and it didn't cope well with dithering.
If you insist on being pessimistic about your own abilities, consider also being pessimistic about the accuracy of that pessimistic judgement.

Offline kullenberg

  • 0001
  • *
  • Posts: 92
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile

Re: Mark Ferarri on 8-bit pixel art. GDC talk. Must watch.

Reply #27 on: April 28, 2016, 05:44:45 pm
What does he mean by "compressing" the dithering?
Just in the usual, 'data compression' sense. RLE encoding was a typical compression technique used at the time, and it didn't cope well with dithering.

Ok, gotcha!

I am so glad these old school guys are getting the recognition they deserve. Social media has had a important role in spreading awareness of these named that in the past would have been forgotten. Mark Ferarri is like the Craig Mullins of pixel art. Wasn't the crowd a bit... Lame and unresponsive though?